> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 4:59 AM, S. Massy wrote: > >> Yeah, well, too many people have already responded with very valid >> points for me to add much. However, I'd like to bring up a certain >> analogy. About ten years ago, I remember a lot of similar discussion >> going on around The Linux Desktop: "How can we make it better?", "How >> can we make it better known?", "Why are people and businesses sticking >> to MS Office?" It was a bit of an obsession in the early 21st century. >> Now, The Linux Desktop isn't exactly used by an overwhelming majority, >> but it has made its way on many common wo/man's computer and is even in >> some schools and small businesses, and a lot of people in the street >> have at least heard of "that Ubuntu thing" and are intrigued. > > Well, what _actually_ happened is that Windows ports of various open > source applications matured and stabilized, and since people were > scared re moving to a new OS, we are now in a situation where vast > majority of users of crossplatform free software such as Audacity and > GIMP are on Windows. I don't have stats for > OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice, but I bet the situation is the same. > > With MIDI/audio software we don't have that much of a problem *cough* > ALSA* cough* JACK *cough*, so it's a stalemate: without Windows we > never get as many users as we want, yet _with_ Windows ports we never > get people to use Linux. > > I don't think there is a simple solution to this. But I think that > this point of yours: > >> So, based on that experience, I'd venture to think that making/improving >> software for our own benefit and creating quality content produced with >> the >> aforementioned software is really what counts in the end. > > makes a hell of a sense. > > Just one minor addition, if you don't mind. We have to finish with > the, IMNSHO, nonsensical notion of our users being geeks who are into > protocols and whatnot. I work for a Linux vendor who is right now into > another bidding process re Linux at schools in my country. Part of the > specification of requirements is on multimedia production software, > and while on details level a lot of that is ridiculous stuff that > boils down to give-us-something-like-garageband/imovie, in general the > requirements make a lot of sense. > > It's the second bidding process like that (i.e. with similar spec of > reqs) we've been through, and one thing I can tell you is that while > some people still say "oh, but I love my complicated routing and I > don't really mind both JS and ladish co-existing, and I hate you > ardour developers for adding MIDI tracks, and don't you even start > talking about video tracks", the kids get macs with propietary > software that is easier to get started with. What they will grow to > like -- you can easily guess. I'm talking about some 2K workstations, > btw. > > Oh, and it's one of the reasons why I still keep an eye on MusE, > hoping that one day they will revamp UI. Because it's, once again, the > second bidding process where the spec says "It should be possible to > select virtual instruments from a library that is part of the > software". So in the future it's either MusE with revamped UI that > doesn't scare kids away, or Qtractor that finally gets a developer to > merge changes from QArranger (I'm referring to native LS client > mostly). But right now it looks more like Rosegarden with modified > default studio and hooks to FluidSynth/QSynth that would load > something like FluidR3_GM.SF2. > This is the kind of feedback that we can only get when companies make the effort to use Linux tools as part of a solution. Chicken vs egg. -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
